age-time patterns of radiation-related cancer risk
Post on 29-Jan-2016
22 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
GSF 2004 1
Age-Time Patterns of Age-Time Patterns of Radiation-Related Cancer RiskRadiation-Related Cancer Risk
Donald A. Pierce
Dale L. Preston
RERF Hiroshima
Michael Vaeth
Aarhus University Denmark
GSF 2004 2
Genesis of Considerations HereGenesis of Considerations Here
• Initially, most thought an single exposure would cause a “wave” of excess cancer, vanishing after 20 years or so
• But by about 1985, we found that age-specific cancer rates were elevated for most or all of lifetime
• Why should this be? Insufficient attention was given to the implications, for both radiation-related cancer and carcinogenesis in general
GSF 2004 3
1980’s and Still-Common View1980’s and Still-Common Viewof the Relative Riskof the Relative Risk
ERR / 100 mSv
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
35 45 55 65 75 85
Age (at risk)
ER
R
Agex 5
Agex 15
Agex 30
Agex 55
(ERR is the % increase in age-specific cancer rate)
GSF 2004 4
But the Current Understanding But the Current Understanding is More as Shown Hereis More as Shown Here
ERR / 100mSv
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
35 45 55 65 75 85Age (at risk)
ERR
Agex 5
Agex 15
Agex 30
Agex 55
Much of so-called exposure-age effect was due to variation with attained age
GSF 2004 5
Reasons Why ERR Reasons Why ERR Should Look Like ThisShould Look Like This
Considering malignancy of a cell as due to accumulated mutations, suppose as a substantial idealization that:
A. The spontaneous rate of the next mutation in a cell depends arbitrarily on its mutational status, but not otherwise on age
B. A brief radiation exposure causes mutations, i. e. momentarily increasing all relevant mutation rates by a factor (1 )d
GSF 2004 6
Implication of ThisImplication of This
• Cancer rate following exposure to dose d is
• Aside from the idealized assumptions, this describes remarkably well the actual radiation cancer risks for A-bomb survivors
• The age increase is about 2-3 days per mSv
0( ) ( )d da a d
GSF 2004 7
Simplest Evaluation of the Age-Simplest Evaluation of the Age-Increment Description Increment Description
Sex-Averaged Cancer Rates by Dose Groups
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
30 40 50 60 70 80
Age
Can
cer
Rat
e
< 0.005
0.005 - 0.50
0.50 - 1.0
1.0 - 2.5
Same on On Transformed Age ScaleMen: age + 4.75 dose (Sv)
Women: age + 9.9 dose (Sv)
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
30 40 50 60 70 80
Age Transformed
Can
cer
Rat
e
The age increment removes the most basic evidenceof a radiation effect on cancer rates
GSF 2004 8
Same Results by Exposure AgeSame Results by Exposure AgeCA Rates for Age-at-Exposure Groups <20. 20-40, >40Solid Lines Entire Cohort on Transformed Age Scale
Dashed Lines Unexposed Group on Regular Age Scale
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
30 40 50 60 70 80
Age Transformed
Ca
nc
er
Ra
te
Effect seen here is birth cohort variation in background cancer rates
GSF 2004 9
Implications for Relative RiskImplications for Relative Risk
• The relation involves no assumption regarding some number of required mutations
• But for whatever reason, during most of life natural cancer rates take form
• Thus the RR could be expected to take form
0 ( ) pa a
( )(1 / ) 1 /
pp
p
a dRR d a p d a
a
0( ) ( )d da a d
ERR
GSF 2004 10
Age-Change Result vs DescriptionAge-Change Result vs Description
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
35 45 55 65 75 85
Age
ER
R /
100
mS
v
Result of Age Change
Agex 5 Description
Agex 15
Agex 30
Agex 55
Theoretical result has no exposure age effect, an important issue with a variety of explanations
GSF 2004 11
Several Refinements Will ExplainSeveral Refinements Will Explainthe Modest Age-at-Exposure Effectthe Modest Age-at-Exposure Effect
• Slight improvement in characterizing birth cohort variations in background rates
• Allowing that part of the birth cohort effect acts additively with radiation
• Modest increase at young ages of mutation rates per unit time
GSF 2004 12
Effect of Slightly Higher Mutation Effect of Slightly Higher Mutation Rates at Young AgesRates at Young Ages
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
35 45 55 65 75 85
Age
ER
R /
100
mS
v
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Age
Va
ria
tio
n
Mutation rate variation
Solid: predicted Dashed: observed
GSF 2004 13
More Immediate EffectsMore Immediate Effects• Those results are for well after end of
exposure (following latent period between malignant cell and cancer)
• Exposure could cause final required mutation and allowing for this we have (but with latent period smoothing)
• This added factor can be important
( ) {1 ( ) / } {1 ( )}pRR a D a a d a
GSF 2004 14
Typical Result for Underground Typical Result for Underground Miners and BEIR VI ModelsMiners and BEIR VI Models
Exposed age 35 to 40
0
1
2
3
4
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
age
ER
R
Mutation model
BEIR 6 model no duration
BEIR 6 model duration
GSF 2004 15
Implications for Radiation & CancerImplications for Radiation & Cancer
• In this way of thinking, radiation does not “induce” cancers, but contributes to the natural process– can explain very simply why naturally why
risk persists for lifetime, but ERR decreases with age
• The “cancer age increase” interpretation can be useful, for analysis and communication
• Suggests substantial commonality between radiation-induced and spontaneous mutations
GSF 2004 16
Implications for Carcinogenesis in Implications for Carcinogenesis in General of General of anyany Multi-Mutation Model Multi-Mutation Model
• Accumulation of required mutations probably begins at a very early age
• Very large numbers of cells would acquire the first several mutations, and thus this would be quite stable from person-to-person
• Most of the person-to-person variation would be due to the long waiting time for the final one or two of required mutations
GSF 2004 17
You Can Find Two You Can Find Two Papers on This AtPapers on This At
http://home.att.ne.jp/apple/pierce/
top related